Methods of defining major haemorrhage after injury: A scoping review

Michael Noonan , Cecil Johnny , Yen Kim , Gerard O'Reilly , Chris Groombridge , Joseph Mathew , Mark Fitzgerald
{"title":"Methods of defining major haemorrhage after injury: A scoping review","authors":"Michael Noonan ,&nbsp;Cecil Johnny ,&nbsp;Yen Kim ,&nbsp;Gerard O'Reilly ,&nbsp;Chris Groombridge ,&nbsp;Joseph Mathew ,&nbsp;Mark Fitzgerald","doi":"10.1016/j.hsr.2024.100164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Injury remains a significant global health concern, with early major haemorrhage (MH) being a leading cause of preventable death. However, the absence of a standardised definition for MH hinders research comparability and optimal clinical decision-making.</p><p>This scoping review aims to explore and categorise the published definitions of MH in adults following injury.</p><p>A systematic search of the Medline (OVID) database and additional sources was conducted following established guidelines. Peer-reviewed articles published in English up to March 2023 were included if they related to injury, and critically unwell adult patients, and included reference to bleeding or haemorrhage.</p><p>Out of 191 identified articles, 50 were included in the final analysis. These studies spanned from 2006 to 2023 and were conducted in various geographic locations. No consistent definition of MH was identified. Definitions of MH fell into six distinct categories: receipt of blood products, physiological parameters, scoring systems, clinical gestalt, observed bleeding (CT or clinical), and composite definitions. The ‘receipt of blood products’ category was the most frequent definition category, with massive transfusion (MT) ‘received’ being the most common definition of MH. Composite definitions and definitions involving the use of physiological parameters were also commonly employed.</p><p>Our scoping review identified wide heterogeneity in the definition of MH following injury. The absence of a standardised definition for MH poses a significant challenge to both injury research and clinical practice. Addressing this gap is crucial in improving systems of trauma care and outcomes for critically bleeding patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73214,"journal":{"name":"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632024000175/pdfft?md5=fb1132dcc0cbacd7e3e5fbfb32506eb5&pid=1-s2.0-S2772632024000175-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632024000175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Injury remains a significant global health concern, with early major haemorrhage (MH) being a leading cause of preventable death. However, the absence of a standardised definition for MH hinders research comparability and optimal clinical decision-making.

This scoping review aims to explore and categorise the published definitions of MH in adults following injury.

A systematic search of the Medline (OVID) database and additional sources was conducted following established guidelines. Peer-reviewed articles published in English up to March 2023 were included if they related to injury, and critically unwell adult patients, and included reference to bleeding or haemorrhage.

Out of 191 identified articles, 50 were included in the final analysis. These studies spanned from 2006 to 2023 and were conducted in various geographic locations. No consistent definition of MH was identified. Definitions of MH fell into six distinct categories: receipt of blood products, physiological parameters, scoring systems, clinical gestalt, observed bleeding (CT or clinical), and composite definitions. The ‘receipt of blood products’ category was the most frequent definition category, with massive transfusion (MT) ‘received’ being the most common definition of MH. Composite definitions and definitions involving the use of physiological parameters were also commonly employed.

Our scoping review identified wide heterogeneity in the definition of MH following injury. The absence of a standardised definition for MH poses a significant challenge to both injury research and clinical practice. Addressing this gap is crucial in improving systems of trauma care and outcomes for critically bleeding patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伤后大出血的定义方法:范围审查
伤害仍是全球关注的重大健康问题,早期大出血(MH)是可预防死亡的主要原因。本范围界定综述旨在对已发表的成人损伤后大出血的定义进行探讨和分类。我们按照既定指南对 Medline (OVID) 数据库和其他来源进行了系统检索。截至 2023 年 3 月,以英语发表的同行评审文章,只要与受伤、重症成人患者有关,并提及出血或大出血,均被纳入研究范围。这些研究的时间跨度从 2006 年到 2023 年,在不同地区进行。没有发现一致的 MH 定义。MH 的定义分为六个不同的类别:接受血制品、生理参数、评分系统、临床态势、观察到的出血(CT 或临床)以及综合定义。接受血液制品 "是最常见的定义类别,其中 "接受大量输血 "是最常见的 MH 定义。我们的范围综述发现,损伤后 MH 的定义存在很大差异。缺乏对 MH 的标准化定义给损伤研究和临床实践带来了巨大挑战。缩小这一差距对于改善创伤护理系统和危重出血患者的治疗效果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health sciences review (Oxford, England)
Health sciences review (Oxford, England) Medicine and Dentistry (General)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
75 days
期刊最新文献
Deciphering the intricacies of immune system dysfunction and its impact on diabetes mellitus: Revisiting the communication strategies to manage diabetes mellitus Revolutionizing menopause management: Nonhormonal therapy for vasomotor symptoms Harnessing the power of natural products against bacterial urinary tract infections: A perspective review for cultivating solutions Unveiling the therapeutic potential of butein: A comprehensive review Advancements in ulcerative colitis management: A critical assessment of etrasimod therapy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1